Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Belkin shows tech firms getting too comfortable with bricking customers' stuff

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 41 posts

Re: Belkin shows tech firms getting too comfortable with bricking customers' stuff

#21

Post by Rygian »

Angostura wrote: post #18
thomassmith65 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd rather a law mandating that all devices include an 'offline' option for any hardware features that could conceivably support one. I don't want to create an account for my toaster, nor have my lightbulb send updates to an analytics server, nor have my washing machine cease to function when my wifi goes down. A ban on products tying hardware features to an internet connection would fix all those problems in additio…

I love this idea. But “ features that could conceivably support one.” is going to be the tricky bit to regulate

"Must be fully operational as described in the brochure without an internet connection. Any features that require an internet connection must be priced and sold as optional enhancements."

Done.

Re: Belkin shows tech firms getting too comfortable with bricking customers' stuff

#22

Post by eddythompson80 »

thomassmith65 wrote: post #5
greatgib wrote: post #3

I'm not against manufacturer stopping support for their Internet Of Shits devices, but there should be a law making it mandatory for them to release source code, protocol specs and whatever is needed so that a man of the craft could be able to do what is necessary to continue using the product that he bought.

I'd rather a law mandating that all devices include an 'offline' option for any hardware features that could conceivably support one. I don't want to create an account for my toaster, nor have my lightbulb send updates to an analytics server, nor have my washing machine cease to function when my wifi goes down. A ban on products tying hardware features to an internet connection would fix all those problems in additio…

I think the problem with this argument is that this is rarely the case.

99% of the time (including incident) they are not requiring an account for your toaster, or lightbulbs or your washing machine ceasing to function when your wifi goes off.

The issue is that you have a washing machine that you bought with a feature that you can watch the inside of the machine while it's running over wifi from anywhere in the world. Then the company "kills" their cloud features (like Belkin is doing wiht Wemo cloud features) and you no longer can watch your 4k stream of the washer working. Not even locally, not remotely, nothing. It's a feature you paid for, and 2 or 3 years down the line it's gone.

Some times the whole functionality of a device is a cloud connectivity, like a bridge or something, or a device that has 0 physical controls (for some design or ascetic reason) then yeah. Those devices would "cease to function"

Aside from really really maliciously designed products, most "smart" products I know of function perfectly fine as their dumb counter parts. The vast shocking majority of smart lights, smart switches, smart outlets, smart locks, and smart toasters I have seen all work as regular "dumb" version. But that's not why you paid the extra $40-$200 on it. Like a regular LED lightbulb is $4 and a Lifx wifi one is $30. It works fine as a regular lightbulb, you never need to do anything to it and you'd never know it has wifi in it.

Re: Belkin shows tech firms getting too comfortable with bricking customers' stuff

#23

Post by OptionOfT »

I have a couple of shades with Somfi motors, and got one of those Bond bridges with it, to connect it to Home-Assistant.

Except you cannot add stuff to that bridge without registering the device to your account. The resale value of the device drops to zero once their server dies, as you cannot add it to a new account, or add new devices to it.

The 1 redeeming factor is that you can control the devices that you have set up in an offline manner.

But I'm still on the lookout for a fully-functional ZWave to Somfi bridge.

And articles like this actually show that I was right in returning my ceiling fan that was Home-Depot-Data-Collecting only. Now I have a more expensive, but HomeKit capable Hunter (which is absolute hell to set up).

Re: Belkin shows tech firms getting too comfortable with bricking customers' stuff

#24

Post by schappim »

I want to shout out to https://usetrmnl.com for showing folks how to actually handle the situation of ensuring that your IoT device will never be bricked.

They released and sponsored open-source servers for their e-ink display in multiple languages: https://github.com/usetrmnl .

I have never seen a better run, community focused IoT hardware company.

Re: Belkin shows tech firms getting too comfortable with bricking customers' stuff

#25

Post by Mister_Snuggles »

Angostura wrote: post #18
thomassmith65 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd rather a law mandating that all devices include an 'offline' option for any hardware features that could conceivably support one. I don't want to create an account for my toaster, nor have my lightbulb send updates to an analytics server, nor have my washing machine cease to function when my wifi goes down. A ban on products tying hardware features to an internet connection would fix all those problems in additio…

I love this idea. But “ features that could conceivably support one.” is going to be the tricky bit to regulate

Rather than regulating features, I'd start with a dependency list.

So a smart plug might have a list saying:

- Functionality requires 2.4GHz WiFi, Internet access, access to whatever.vendor.com, and a vendor.com account.

- Provisioning requires the above plus BLE and Vendor's app.

A smart washing machine might be more complex:

- Express wash requires nothing special.

- Regular wash requires 2.4GHz WiFi, Internet access, access to whatever.vendor.com, and a vendor.com account.

- Heavy Duty wash requires the above plus a vendor-supplied detergent cartridge.

Re: Belkin shows tech firms getting too comfortable with bricking customers' stuff

#26

Post by barbazoo »

sam_lowry_ wrote: post #10
barbazoo wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is as "easy" as that. My assumption is these are mostly optional things we think we "need" so a little friction finding something that doesn't suck isn't the worst thing. Reigns in our consumerism a little bit too.

Google or Apple phones also?

For any smartphone I guess, can any one provider cut you off from using it? For Apple and Google Pixel phones that might be true, but not for all smartphones out there.

There are lots of custom Android running phones that you can truly own.

Re: Belkin shows tech firms getting too comfortable with bricking customers' stuff

#27

Post by orev »

eddythompson80 wrote: post #22
thomassmith65 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd rather a law mandating that all devices include an 'offline' option for any hardware features that could conceivably support one. I don't want to create an account for my toaster, nor have my lightbulb send updates to an analytics server, nor have my washing machine cease to function when my wifi goes down. A ban on products tying hardware features to an internet connection would fix all those problems in additio…

I think the problem with this argument is that this is rarely the case. 99% of the time (including incident) they are not requiring an account for your toaster, or lightbulbs or your washing machine ceasing to function when your wifi goes off. The issue is that you have a washing machine that you bought with a feature that you can watch the inside of the machine while it's running over wifi from anywhere in the world…

There are definitely many products that need no account or cloud functionality at all, but still make you sign up for an account. Philips Hue did this recently for their app, when the bulbs only need local WiFi or ZigBee, but then decided to force you into an account “for your convenience” to sync minor things that don’t matter. The bulbs still work without the app, but you can’t control or update the firmware without an account (or some other system like Home Assistant)

Re: Belkin shows tech firms getting too comfortable with bricking customers' stuff

#28

Post by PaulKeeble »

superkuh wrote: post #4

This all started with software and because we didn't stop it there it'll keep happening to software that runs hardware. There was a popular game called "Rocket League" that Psyonix company sold and ran the infrastructure for for many years. But then Epic corporation bought Psyonix for Rocket League's playerbase to bootstrap their proprietary game delivery service. 6 months later everyone who had bought the game for M…

The Sony playstation 3 was another example where it let you run Linux and then people found a way to use the hardware to its fullest (the coprocessors were locked in Linux) and Sony pulled support. Took some court cases but customers got partial refunds then too. HP also lost a lawsuit on blocking ink jet cartridges too.

I think this law needs to move to basic consumer protection and under the protection of a quango and they have a lot of companies to go after now.

Re: Belkin shows tech firms getting too comfortable with bricking customers' stuff

#29

Post by quantified »

supportengineer wrote: post #13
tocs3 wrote: post #2

Do not buy stuff you do not own.

Rules out any vehicle for sale in the US today with a built-in cellular connection.

I haven't bought for a long time, are these required to run the car? Or is it just prohibitively obscure to disable it (smash the antenna or connect it to ground, for example).

Re: Belkin shows tech firms getting too comfortable with bricking customers' stuff

#30

Post by altairprime »

greatgib wrote: post #3

I'm not against manufacturer stopping support for their Internet Of Shits devices, but there should be a law making it mandatory for them to release source code, protocol specs and whatever is needed so that a man of the craft could be able to do what is necessary to continue using the product that he bought.

In lieu of a law, a class action against Bellingham that publicly states “we will settle for $1 in exchange for you publishing all protocol docs, device firmware source code, and any private keys used to authenticate firmware installed for these devices, so that competitors can pick up where Belkin left off” would absolutely hold their feet to the fire on this.
Post reply on HN